Light emission and recoil are two undesirable side effects commonly experienced upon discharging a firearm. Both side effects can adversely affect the speed and accuracy of subsequent discharges from a firearm. Recoil is the backwards momentum felt by a shooter as a result of the forward momentum of the projectile and the expanding gases exiting the barrel. The backwards momentum felt by a shooter can directly impeded the ability of a shooter to maintain proper alignment with a target and cost valuable time in order to readjust alignment. Light emission produced upon discharging a firearm, commonly known as a muzzle flash, is the result of propellant gases containing oxidizable compounds exiting the barrel and making contact with ambient oxygen at temperatures sufficient to cause ignition. The resulting combustion produces an incandescent gas cloud of sufficient intensity capable of temporarily blinding a shooter during night time or low light conditions as well as potentially disclosing their position in a hostile situation.
While a variety of muzzle attachments have been developed in order to mitigate or eliminate muzzle flash and recoil, many of the devices fall short of addressing both side effects effectively. This situation is a result of the manner in which propellant gases are diverted upon exiting the barrel. To mitigate recoil, most muzzle devices divert propellant gases through openings that direct gases above and/or to the sides of the muzzle end of the bore line. These recoil mitigating devices are able to control the dispersion of propellant gases in a manner that reduces and counteracts the effects of recoil. Unfortunately one disadvantage experienced with some of these recoil mitigating devices is potentiating ignition of the propellant gases. On the other hand, some muzzle devices intended to reduce muzzle flash fail to manage recoil. Muzzle devices intended to reduce muzzle flash are able to do so by dispersing propellant gases through openings positioned circumferentially around the muzzle end of the bore line. These muzzle flash reducing devices are able to quickly disperse propellant gases in manner that reduces the temperature of the gases sufficiently preventing their combustion upon contacting ambient oxygen. Unfortunately, to reduce muzzle flash, the propellant gases are generally dispersed in a manner resulting in no significant compensation to recoil or muzzle climb.
Recoil reduction by redirecting gasses to the side or to the rear of the firearm has been well understood for many years. For instance, Hughes U.S. Pat. No. 2,212,683 ‘Control For Recoil’ is one of the earliest patents approved for a muzzle mounted device that redirects the propellant gases in a manner which reduces recoil felt by a shooter. While it has long been understood that recoil can be reduced by redirecting propellant gases to the side and the rear of a weapon, historically, these attempts not been able to mitigate muzzle flash intensity. Although there have been several designs that have sought to overcome this disadvantage, few designs have achieved significant success. As a result of this situation, many muzzle devices have abandoned recoil management in favor of flash suppression. Currently flash suppression devices exist in two common configurations an open suppressor configuration and a bird cage configuration. The open ended configurations comprise a plurality of prongs positioned radially around the muzzle end of the bore line. The birdcage configuration is similar to the open configuration with the exception that the prongs feature a ring on the distal of the muzzle device that binds the ends of the prongs together forming a caged structure. Currently open ended style muzzle devices, such as those by of Advanced Armament Corp., LLC (Brittingham U.S. Pat. No. 7,905,170), BE Meyers (Meyers U.S. Pat. No. 6,837,139 and Meyers U.S. Pat. No. 7,302,774) and Smith Enterprises (Sommers U.S. Pat. No. 5,596,161) all effectively suppress flash, but lack effective recoil management. Such open end muzzle devices also have a tendency to ring loudly after firing, as a result of harmonic resonance between the prongs positioned radially around the bore line. This lingering sound is an undesired side effect of current flash suppressing muzzle devices. This distinct sound signature produced by current flash suppressing muzzle devices is at best a subtle annoyance and at worst an audible indicator for locating the position of the firearm operator.
It is therefore the object of the present invention to provide a muzzle device that reduces effects of recoil and inhibits muzzle flash while preventing audible harmonic resonant ringing. The present invention accomplishes this through the use of an open ended muzzle device that redirects a portion of the high velocity gasses exiting the terminal end of the weapon through asymmetrically placed narrowing exhaust openings. The asymmetrically placed narrowing exhaust openings reduce light emissions by allowing propellant gases to cool prior to mixing with ambient air and redirecting the exiting gases to the side with an upward bias reducing recoil. Furthermore, the asymmetric placement of the narrowing exhaust openings allows the prongs to be of variable size which reduce the production of audible harmonic resonant ringing. Additional resistance to resonant ringing is achieved by unequal volume cavities located at the distil ends of the prongs which further alter vibration characteristics.